Jodey C. Arrington

Became law (3)

• 

  Jodey Arrington (R-TX)· Jul 4

  Their bill

  One Big Beautiful Bill Act

  An act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14.

  H.R. 1 Economics and Public Finance

  A Republican bill with no cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The House voted 218–214 on Jul 3.

  This legislation provides for reconciliation and encompasses significant changes across many sectors, including agriculture, defense, energy, and tax policy.

  Yes· 2 of 50

  • Scored +7

    Would workers who earn tips be better off under this?

    The bill introduces a new tax exclusion for qualified tips, which would provide direct tax relief to tipped workers.

  • Scored +7

    Does this tighten control of the border?

    The bill allocates massive funding for border walls, personnel, technology, and infrastructure.

  The opposite· 2 of 17

  • Scored -6

    Would immigrants be better off under this?

    The bill imposes numerous new fees and increases detention and enforcement activities.

  • Scored -6

    Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power?

    The bill terminates several key credits for wind, solar, and hydrogen, which likely reduces renewable energy investment.

• 

  Pete Stauber (R-MN)· Dec 12

  Cosponsored

  Miracle on Ice Congressional Gold Medal Act

  H.R. 452 Sports and Recreation

  A Republican bill with 107 Democratic cosponsors.

  Became law

  This Act authorizes the award of 3 Congressional Gold Medals to the members of the 1980 U.S. Olympic Men's Ice Hockey Team. The medals recognize the team's victory over the Soviet Union during the 1980 Winter Olympics.

  Yes

  • Scored +1

    Is this likely to grow the economy?

    The sale of duplicate bronze medals provides a small influx of revenue to the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund.

  No question was scored the opposite.

• 

  August Pfluger (R-TX)· Mar 14

  Cosponsored

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting and Exemptions".

  H.J.Res. 35 Environmental Protection

  A Republican resolution with 19 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The Senate voted 52–47 on Feb 27.

  This is a joint resolution from the 119th Congress. It seeks to express congressional disapproval of a specific rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency.

  Yes· 2 of 5

  • Scored +5

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    The resolution benefits energy industry owners by eliminating a specific compliance charge and its associated procedures.

  • Scored +3

    Does this make it easier to run a small business?

    Preventing the emissions charge reduces the regulatory and financial compliance burden on energy-related businesses.

  The opposite· 2 of 4

  • Scored -6

    Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?

    The resolution removes the regulatory mechanisms designed to penalize and reduce methane and other waste emissions from petroleum and natural gas systems.

  • Scored -5

    Does this raise the taxes companies pay?

    The resolution prevents the implementation of a waste emissions charge on petroleum and natural gas systems, which would have functioned as a tax on those industries.

Passed Congress — the President's turn (1)

Both chambers passed it. The President signs it into law or vetoes it, and a veto stands unless two-thirds of each chamber vote to pass it anyway. Everything Congress has sent the President →

• 

  Jodey Arrington (R-TX)· Apr 10

  Their bill

  Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034.

  H.Con.Res. 14 Economics and Public Finance

  A Republican resolution with no cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed both chambers

  216 – 214

  This concurrent resolution establishes the budget framework for fiscal years 2025 through 2034. It sets specific budgetary levels for Federal revenues, new budget authority, outlays, deficits, and public debt.

  Yes· 2 of 15

  • Scored +6

    Does this reduce what the federal government spends?

    The bill directs various committees to submit changes in law to reduce the deficit.

  • Scored +5

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    The bill promotes deregulation and tax policy stability to benefit businesses.

  The opposite· 2 of 3

  • Scored -2

    Would households on low incomes be better off under this?

    The bill's mandate to reduce mandatory spending by $2 trillion could impact social service programs.

  • Scored -2

    Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?

    The broad mandate for spending reductions could impact veterans' benefits.

Passed one chamber, waiting on the other (16)

Halfway: the other chamber has to pass the same text before it can go to the President.

• 

  Jodey Arrington (R-TX)· Jul 23

  Their bill

  Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2027 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2028 through 2036.

  H.Con.Res. 113 Economics and Public Finance

  A Republican resolution with no cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Adopted by the House

  The House voted 216–214 on Jul 22.

  Since then: taken out of a Senate committee without the committee acting on it

  Now: in the queue for a floor vote, with no date set · Jul 23

  This concurrent resolution establishes the congressional budget for fiscal year 2027 and sets budgetary levels for the years 2028 through 2036.

  Yes· 2 of 10

  • Scored +3

    Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?

    The resolution sets high and increasing outlays for veterans benefits and services.

  • Scored +3

    Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?

    The bill provides authority to adjust allocations for disaster relief activities.

  The opposite· 2 of 3

  • Scored -6

    Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?

    The bill projects large annual deficits and rising debt levels for a decade.

  • Scored -5

    Does this reduce what the federal government spends?

    The budget establishes significantly high annual outlays that lead to substantial annual deficits.

• 

  Bryan Steil (R-WI)· Jul 22

  Cosponsored

  Stop Insider Trading Act

  H.R. 7008 Congress

  A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed the House

  232 – 198

  This bill places strict purchasing limits and transparency rules on stock trading for Members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children.

  Yes· 2 of 3

  • Scored +6

    Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?

    The bill requires Members of Congress to publicly disclose intent to sell specific investments before doing so.

  • Scored +5

    Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?

    The bill restricts Members of Congress from trading specific securities, which may reduce potential conflicts of interest and insider trading advantages.

  The opposite· 2 of 3

  • Scored -3

    Does this protect the right to vote?

    The bill imposes new photo identification requirements for all federal elections, which may create barriers to voting.

  • Scored -2

    Would households on low incomes be better off under this?

    The new photo ID requirements may create administrative or financial hurdles for low-income voters.

• 

  Riley Moore (R-WV)· Jul 14

  Cosponsored

  Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act

  H.R. 1181 Finance and Financial Sector

  A Republican bill with 132 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed the House

  221 – 201

  Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs · Jul 15

  This bill prohibits payment card networks and covered entities from using specific merchant category codes to distinguish firearms retailers from other types of retailers.

  Yes· 2 of 4

  • Scored +6

    Does this protect the right to own guns?

    The bill protects the privacy of firearms transactions which supports the ability to conduct lawful gun commerce.

  • Scored +5

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    Firearms retailers are protected from being uniquely identified by their merchant category codes.

  The opposite

  • Scored -7

    Does this leave more decisions to the states?

    The bill preempts state and local laws that regulate the assignment or use of merchant category codes for firearms retailers.

And 13 more on their Sponsored and Cosponsored pages.

Who their bills would affect

• Would business owners be better off under this? 9 no, 49 yes. 5 of these passed a chamber
• Would households on low incomes be better off under this? 26 no, 29 yes. 8 of these passed a chamber (3 yes, 5 no)
• Would people in rural areas be better off under this? 1 no, 35 yes. 2 of these passed a chamber (1 yes, 1 no)
• Would people over 65 be better off under this? 3 no, 21 yes. 4 of these passed a chamber (3 yes, 1 no)

What else they would change

• Does this give the federal government more power? 14 no, 34 yes. 3 of these passed a chamber
• Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? 2 no, 45 yes. 5 of these passed a chamber
• Does this reduce what the federal government spends? 11 no, 24 yes. 8 of these passed a chamber (5 yes, 3 no)
• Is this likely to grow the economy? 3 no, 31 yes. 5 of these passed a chamber